David Ferrer seems to divide opinion a lot these days. Since he's solidified himself as a top ten player, and made the number five ranking his own, general tennis fans have become more accustomed to seeing him on the stadium court at the crucial stages of the biggest tournaments around the world. He seems to be loved by a few, and respected by many for his hard work and dedication to tennis. On the other hand an increasing number of people are growing impatient at his lack of threat in the important matches against players ranked higher than him, and his style which is relentlessly intense and effective, if a bit repetitive.

So my question for you all is, why don't other top pros take a leaf out of Ferrer's book and work harder on fitness, put more hours in on the practice court, and finally discover a more balanced mentality?

that you have a hugely caricatural vision of Ferrer comparing to other players doesn't make it true

Besides, if you mean that Ferrer moves greater than most players on Tour, it's not only because he works very hard but also because of his body constitution and "talent" for that.

Never will Almagro, Wawrinka or Berdych move like Ferrer (I mentioned Almagro and Wawrinka because it's not only a matter of being short or tall), however hard they work, that's also a talent.

But it's far from being the only talent or ability that this guy has, comparing to the caricatural vision guys like you have from him.

Just watch his matches against Nadal in Barcelona last year, or against Del Po in Wimbledon, or against Berdych in Davis cup ... with an opened look, and maybe you will understand that this guy also knows how to play great tennis and position the ball in bad places for the opponent for multiple balls in a row, he has less power than others but it's not only that he moves great, even though it's also true and should also be considered as a tennis talent, especially in modern times.

Ferrer has benefitted from slower court conditions, that's true, but apart from that, just so many players are unable to just see what he does great, probably because they can't see that tennis is not only made of one shot but of several ones after the other The "tennis boom-boom" is just only one version of tennis, probably the easiest to understand but not the original or purest one.

In his young time, Ferrer had a very low self-confidence, I remember reading other players (seems they know something about tennis comparing to great MTF experts ) saying that he could play great but just didn't know it. Not only did he work hard but also he just realized his real abilities.

that you have a hugely caricatural vision of Ferrer comparing to other players doesn't make it true

I don't think so. I'm sure he himself will admit that he works very hard, but the evidence is clear that he's not a big threat to the top four. The recent semi-final shows this, while Berdych and Wawrinka were able to challenge Djokovic more closely. Please don't interpret this as me saying that Berdych and Wawrinka are better players than Ferrer, that's not the case. What I am saying is that they are more threatening, more likely to cause an upset because they can hit through the top four more easily.

Quote:

Besides, if you mean that Ferrer moves greater than most players on Tour, it's not only because he works very hard but also because of his body constitution and "talent" for that.

Yes, that's true, but on the flip side, Tsonga, Berdych et al have bodies that have 'talent' for big serves. I think if every player works as hard as they can, they will benefit from the skillset that their body is geared towards, so for Ferrer it's movement and agility. Whereas with Berdych and Tsonga, it's strength and power.

Having said that, I still think the more lazy guys can improve their movement a lot, if they were more dedicated. They can't just discount it because they're tall.

Quote:

Never will Almagro, Wawrinka or Berdych move like Ferrer (I mentioned Almagro and Wawrinka because it's not only a matter of being short or tall), however hard they work, that's also a talent.

But they can still take a leaf out of his book and work a bit harder, scedule a bit smarter and know when to pull the trigger or not during a match.

Quote:

But it's far from being the only talent or ability that this guy has, comparing to the caricatural vision guys like you have from him.

Obviously…

You have to be joking with me if you think I would maintain an opinion hat somebody would get to number four in the world just on hard work and superior movement? Look, Bjorn Phau is a better mover than Ferrer, but I'll openly admit that he doesn't have the ball striking talent that Ferrer has. Yes, Ferrer is a good ball striker, but not the fourth best in the world. It's not his main talent, that's the point. Tennis is more than just about technical talent, though. Ferrer is definitely top five in the world these days mentally and physically. One could also argue that tactically he is extremely astute. These more than account for his obvious technical deficiencies which revolve around a lack of power.

Quote:

Just watch his matches against Nadal in Barcelona last year, or against Del Po in Wimbledon, or against Berdych in Davis cup ... with an opened look, and maybe you will understand that this guy also knows how to play great tennis and position the ball in bad places for the opponent for multiple balls in a row, he has less power than others but it's not only that he moves great, even though it's also true and should also be considered as a tennis talent, especially in modern times.

I don't deny that. I'm not a fool who would argue with the fact that he's a very good and intelligent tennis player. Nobody gets to the top five unless they have a mastery over most aspects of the modern game. Ferrer is no exception.

Quote:

Ferrer has benefitted from slower court conditions, that's true, but apart from that, just so many players are unable to just see what he does great, probably because they can't see that tennis is not only made of one shot but of several ones after the other The "tennis boom-boom" is just only one version of tennis, probably the easiest to understand but not the original or purest one.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you're interpreting my article as having a dig at Ferrer? That's totally not the case, of anything, I appreciate what he's done, because if he had the mentality of most of the other players out there, he'd be a perennial 'floater'.

Quote:

In his young time, Ferrer had a very low self-confidence, I remember reading other players (seems they know something about tennis comparing to great MTF experts ) saying that he could play great but just didn't know it. Not only did he work hard but also he just realized his real abilities.

Yes, as I said, one can't reach number four in the world without general talent.

I don't think so. I'm sure he himself will admit that he works very hard

Well, actually, I don't have the link to the interview but I think he's usually quite dismissive of the statement that he works harder than the others. He says something which seems pretty sensible to me, namely that every top player works very hard.
So I don't know if he's just being modest, but... I also tend to believe that it's a bit ridiculous to praise one sportsman for being a really hard worker, when you can expect that any guy at this level would have to be a very hard worker. It's difficult to check anyway.

I wouldn't be so sure that Ferrer works so much harder than the players below him. My impression is that the difference is in his attitude. He's probably more down-to-earth and more mature, he knows what works for him, he knows how to handle victory and defeat, etc...

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bulldog

Tennis is more than just about technical talent, though. Ferrer is definitely top five in the world these days mentally and physically. One could also argue that tactically he is extremely astute. These more than account for his obvious technical deficiencies which revolve around a lack of power.

Nice to hear someone say that he is tactically astute... I'm tired of hearing people claim that he "always does the same things", that he's "predictable", that he has "no ability to adapt" (they were saying that on Eurosport the other day). I believe this is really unfair. He does have limitations, of course, and sometimes he cannot find the solution to beat a really great player. But to conclude that he has no tactical sense and no ability to adapt... I think that's just not fair. What got him where he is now, if not adaptability? He is truly an exception in the Top 20 (50?) in terms of height, so he had to use his own strengths and try to compensate for his weaknesses. That takes more ability to adapt than when you are a giant and a natural-born ballbasher, it seems to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bulldog

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you're interpreting my article as having a dig at Ferrer? That's totally not the case, of anything, I appreciate what he's done, because if he had the mentality of most of the other players out there, he'd be a perennial 'floater'.

I think duong thought you were yet another guy trying to imply that Ferrer was a one-dimensional, talentless workhorse
I did not understand your post in that way, but of course, in the current context, with all the Ferrer haters... you can understand why it can be understood in the wrong way!

because there are very very very few players on tour with Ferrer like work ethic and determination, talent level aside. Ferrer relishes long matches and pain and long rallies, he's a freak of nature physically and mentally, just can't beat the other top 3/4.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you're interpreting my article as having a dig at Ferrer? That's totally not the case, of anything, I appreciate what he's done, because if he had the mentality of most of the other players out there, he'd be a perennial 'floater'.

my problem is not about having a dig at Ferrer or not, I'm not a Ferrer-fan at all, and I'm not here to defend him, besides he's so modest that he would probably let you say that shit.

It's just that you spread that vision about Ferrer which I just think is wrong in a big part but is said everywhere,
and which is tiring me a lot.

Still this shit about Ferrer not threatening top-players whereas other players would threaten them

Ferrer's H2H with other top-players (yes, rather Murray and Djokovic than Federer and Nadal, I think it's a big reason why people keep on not seeing it) proves that it's wrong yet you take one match in a semifinal and the full bag of prejudice to say that : I'm very tired of arguing about that, as I know that your prejudice are shared by many ones,

but I'm convinced that this vision has 50% truth and 50% prejudice.

I think the day when Ferrer defeats Federer, and I see absolutely no reason apart from his mental complex, where he wouldn't defeat Federer when Simon gave Fed so many problems (I'm as afraid, and even more, of Simon as of Berdych still now as a Fed-fan, even though Simon is much lower-ranked), people will change their mind a lot, because I'm convinced that people look too much at the results of matches against Federer (or against Nadal as well) to make their own judgment. Ferrer just didn't face Federer in good circumstances (for instance he only faced Fed on clay when Fed was at his best and when Ferrer was not, or he faced him in Madrid on quick clay), but I'm convinced he would have a great chance to defeat him if he did. As for matches against Nadal, he threatens Nadal much more than Berdych does imo, but still many tennis amateurs fail seeing it because they love ballbashers and "boom-boom tennis"

I like Federer, and I'm afraid for his top-4 seed, but in a way, I wish this day will come, because I'm really fed-up with arguing with people who can't just accept to open their eyes a little bit from their prejudice.

After all, only one match by Rosol or by Wawrinka completely changed people's look on them, it might also happen about Ferrer, because people are so dumb that their opinion seems to be only oriented by one big match like that.

I think duong thought you were yet another guy trying to imply that Ferrer was a one-dimensional, talentless workhorse
I did not understand your post in that way, but of course, in the current context, with all the Ferrer haters... you can understand why it can be understood in the wrong way!

no I know the Bulldog, and I know he's not a Ferrer-hater, but I'm just fed-up with his vision of Ferrer in some recent posts he said.

I disagree with it and am tired of it because even if it has a little part of truth, it's so caricatural that it prevents people from seeing many things which are also true.

As I said, I was very surprised when I made my file about H2Hs among top-players that Ferrer was the best for that stat after the top-4, much better than Nalbandian or Davydenko, and of course than Berdych or Tsonga.

Besides, it's not true either that Ferrer never loses to lower-ranked players, is never tired ... it may be truer in recent years because he's reached a superior level (but the same can be said of Federer ) but it's not the case overall in his carreer : he has many losses to lower-ranked players and has indeed a very good H2H against top-players.

When Berdych constantly reached Masters 1000 and grand slam quartefinals and constantly lost to higher-ranked players in 2011, nobody did even notice it, they are just so much in their prejudice

Still defeated Murray in Roland-Garros and was very near from leading 2 sets to love against him in Wimbledon.

If it had been Berdych and a "boom-boom tennis", there would have been tuns of messages about it

You have to be kidding; beating Murray on clay is not a big scalp by any stretch of the imagination. Do you know how many titles Murray won on clay in his career? How many finals he reached? How many times he beat top 10 players on clay?

Says a lot about Ferrer's inaptitude on the big stage if that's the only thing you can bring to the table. There'd have been no 'messages' had Berdych beaten Murray on clay at RG, it'd have been a totally expected outcome.

You have to be kidding; beating Murray on clay is not a big scalp by any stretch of the imagination. Do you know how many titles Murray won on clay in his career? How many finals he reached? How many times he beat top 10 players on clay?

Says a lot about Ferrer's inaptitude on the big stage if that's the only thing you can bring to the table. There'd have been no 'messages' had Berdych beaten Murray on clay at RG, it'd have been a totally expected outcome.

there would have been tuns of messages if Berdych had been so near to leading 2 sets to love against Murray in Wimbledon and to taking him to a fifth set.

And Murray is as good as anyone on grass and it's Ferrer's worst surface (where he still ridiculed Del Potro).

Besides, there would be so much shit said if Berdych had a leading H2H against Djokovic on clay.

Yes, I know : as long as it's not Federer or Nadal concerned, nobody cares

But I really think that the best two players in the world now are Djokovic and Murray, not Fed and Nadal.

Did you pee in your pants as well when Simon or Canas defeated Federer ?

Are they those famous "big hitters" about whom I read so many bullshits been said ?

Why does Fed fear Simon more than Söderling or Del Potro ?

Didn't it knock anything to all the people who keep on spreading that stupid prejudice that old Fed is overpowered by the so-called "big hitters" on quick courts, that the only surface where Söderling defeated Fed, is actually clay ?

By the way, did you enjoy Chardy's forehand lesson to Del Po ? Did it knock anywhere at the external side of the box of your closed mind ?

there would have been tuns of messages if Berdych had been so near to leading 2 sets to love against Murray in Wimbledon and to taking him to a fifth set.

And Murray is as good as anyone on grass and it's Ferrer's worst surface (where he still ridiculmed Del Potro).

Besides, there would be so much shit said if Berdych had a leading H2H against Djokovic on clay.

Yes, I know : as long as it's not Federer or Nadal concerned, nobody cares

But I really think that the best two players in the world now are Djokovic and Murray, not Fed and Nadal.

Did you pee in your pants as well when Simon or Canas defeated Federer ?

Are they those famous "big hitters" about whom I read so many bullshits been said ?

Why does Fed fear Simon more than Söderling or Del Potro ?

Really, who would have written those messages? Before this year, Berdych actually had more Wimbledon finals than Murray and led their H2H, no one would have been impressed with him 'almost winning two sets'

And Berdych does lead the H2H vs Djokovic on grass, Tsonga leads Djokovic 4-1 indoors, I don't see many people talking about that. As usual, you're just making up stuff to suit your biased views.

And in what world does Federer fear effing Simon more than the only player apart from Nadal to beat in a Slam final and the guy who stopped his Slam SF streak (Soderling)? You have to be kidding me.

Really, who would have written those messages? Before this year, Berdych actually had more Wimbledon finals than Murray and led their H2H, no one would have been impressed with him 'almost winning two sets'

And Berdych does lead the H2H vs Djokovic on grass, Tsonga leads Djokovic 4-1 indoors, I don't see many people talking about that. As usual, you're just making up stuff to suit your biased views.